Madam Jenny's

Kavanaugh's Judiciary Hearing Day Four

By: Jenny Lea

September 7, 2018

Today is the final day Senators get to take their soap boxes
out for the Kavanaugh Judiciary Hearing. Thus far, the Democrats brought bigger
boxes with them than the Republicans. Hopefully, everyone attending the hearing
for the last three days have worn a good pair of boots, about knee high.

Standing
Committee

The Standing Committee (14 members) gave Kavanaugh the
highest possible rating. They determined his integrity, judicial temperament
and professional competence rated at the highest level. They made a
non-partisan evaluation.

(D) Chris Coons: Wanted to know if the Standing Committee
would be upset if their recommendations were not included when deciding to elect
Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court. The representative for the Standing Committee answered,
“Yes”. Coons ended by saying that he does take their recommendation seriously,
he was merely asking the question.

(D) Sheldon Whitehouse: He wanted to know if the Standing
Committee noticed any kind of pattern in Kavanaugh’s decision making. More
specifically if he was more prone to take the side of a Conservative over a Leftist.
The Committee Chairman said the only pattern they noticed was Kavanaugh always
took the side of the law and/or precedent, but they did not specifically check
to see if the plaintiff or defendant happened to be Republican or Democrat. They offered to look if need be. Whitehouse
told them not to worry about it unless there happens to be enough time.
Whitehouse also tossed in how odd it was that over 90% of the Republicans going
to court are ending up innocent and something must be going on. When over 90%
of a certain group is ending up innocent in court, it can make one wonder if they
have the Judge in their pocket. But it could also mean, Republicans are having
to deal with more frivolous lawsuits than other people. It goes both ways.

First Group of Witnesses

Luke McCloud: (Clerk) Kavanaugh wanted clerks of different
gender, race, religion, financial status, ultimately as diverse as possible. He
wanted to be able to discuss cases with people that would be familiar with
different situations to help him better understand a case.

Rochelle Garza: A lawyer from Brownsville, Texas. She
defended a pregnant illegal immigrant “Jane Doe” that was seeking an abortion in the U.S. The “Trump
administration” was attempting to deport her and according to Garza made life
difficult. Kavanaugh was one of the Federal Judges who was involved with the
case. He allowed the US to delay her request for an abortion. The issue was
referred to the federal level due to Jane Doe having second thoughts about the
abortion and the possible influence pushed on Jane Doe by Garza and her law
firm. Source: Jane Doe
v. Office of Refugee Resettlement.

Louisa
Garry: Friends since College.

Elizabeth
Weintraub: Suffers from cerebal palsy. She was upset at a court decision in
which Kavanaugh did not accept the views of the mentally challenged. She was
difficult to understand. I am not sure what case specifically, but she did not trust
Kavanaugh to take the mentally challenged population seriously in future cases.

Cedric
Richmond: (Congressional Black Caucus from Louisiana) He brought up several issues
including Miranda rights, voting accessibility and other issues, that were
mainly a state’s responsibility but have made their way into Federal court. When
it comes to voting accessibility, Federal law requires voting booths to be
handicap accessible. As for the number of booths and their location, it is a County
and State issue and if there is an issue a voter can call their State, sue
their State and possibly get to the Supreme Court. So many years ago, I
noticed, in Harlingen, Texas, there was one voting location for Republicans. It
was in an empty mini-mall on the edge of town. Democrats on the other hand had
over ten voting locations to vote in for the primaries. I contacted the state
of Texas. It turned out, they were unaware those in charge of voting in South
Texas were setting it up that way and by the next year it was remedied.
However, when it comes to needing an ID to vote, the Supreme Court has been
utilized.

Theodore
Olson: Pro-Kavanaugh… He started talking and… I became distracted and next
thing I know he was done talking. He reminded me of my past political
professor. I passed, but I can’t promise I ever listened to any of his speeches
to their full number of minutes.

Alicia
Baker: (Ordained Minister) She was concerned that Kavanaugh could prevent women
from getting FREE birth control. Apparently, her insurance company did not pay
for her birth control pills (due to the company’s religious beliefs), and at
the time she was planning her wedding. She was stressed about arguing with her
insurance company, setting up her wedding and having to pay for her birth
control pills. I guess no one uses condoms anymore. Seriously, Trojan Ecstasy
12 pack costs about $8. No side effects, they don’t cause mood swings or weight
gain, and they are disposable. You just need to be responsible and throw them
in a trash can. No one wants to see a turtle choking on a condom; because,
condoms will be banned next.

Colleen Roh
Sinzdak: (Student of Judge Kavnaugh) She approves Kavanaugh’s nomination to the
Supreme Court. She is a registered Democrat. Even though they are on opposite
party lines, Kavanaugh taught her to never see colors but to look at each case
objectively.

Melissa
Murray: (Law Professor) On a personal level she said she likes Kavanaugh, or
more specifically, Kavanaugh is a nice guy. However, she rambled on about
women’s reproductive rights and the right for women to have an abortion. She
twisted around Kavanaugh’s use of the phrase “settled law”. Settled law does
not have a definitive definition. Earlier in the hearing, Kavanaugh said it,
settled law, as in it has become a way of life.

Prof. Akihl
Reed Amar: He is pro-Kavanaugh. He had many “points” as to why Kavanaugh was
the best choice. He ended by telling Republicans they have the best and
brightest, rejoice. He told his fellow Democrats, to be weary. If they don’t
choose Kavanaugh, they will most likely end up with someone worse, who is less
objective, not as intelligent and so on.

Senators begin Questioning the First Group of Witnesses

(D) Diane Feinstein:
Named all the women who were anti-Kavanaugh and congratulated them. Then put a
blanket thank you for the rest of the women. She talked to Rochelle Garza about
“Jane Doe” the pregnant illegal immigrant who wanted an abortion. Garza said the US
Court of Appeals (Judges included Kavanaugh) had allowed Texas to maintain a
hold on “Jane’s” abortion date. Feinstein continued the questioning concerning
“Jane” but moved on to Melissa Murray. According to Murray, Kavanaugh does not
always follow precedent and she gave examples. One example was, Whole Woman's
Health v. Hellerstedt. Which was a case about the restrictions on clinics, not specifically
women. The “undue burden” would be caused by a large number of clinics closing
down, who could not maintain the new regulations and women having to drive over
200 miles to the nearest clinic. It is understandable that Kavanaugh did not
consider the case when determining the “Jane Doe” case. It was not a direct “undue
burden” on the woman. Driving too far, was an indirect burden on women.
Apparently, parents driving their kids 200 miles or more to the nearest children’s
hospital or Veterans driving over 200 miles to the nearest Veterans hospital is
NOT an “Undue Burden”, but heaven forfend a woman drives more than 200 miles
for an abortion. Anyway, Murray went on to refer to Bellotti vs. Baird,
concerning parental consent, and that Kavanaugh did not refer to that case
either. The main part, that Rochelle Garza is leaving out, is the main reason
the case was moved to federal court. At some point in time “Jane Doe” changed
her mind and did not want an abortion, and no longer wanted Rochelle Garza as
her attorney. At that point the State, requested a shift from state to federal
court. “Jane Doe” changing her mind and no longer wanting Rochelle Garza, her
attorney and her parental guardian, to be involved in her case, caused legal
issues. Her parental guardian, Rochelle Garza, was still pushing for the
abortion, while the underage girl was telling the State she changed her
mind. At the end, Jane Doe still had the abortion, but no matter the results if
she changes her mind at any point, her parental guardian should have taken that
into account, but since her parental guardian was also her attorney, her
parental guardian may not have been seeking results that were in her best
interest. Source: Jane Doe v. ORR

(R)Ted Cruz:
Asked Professor Amar and Olson how they felt about Kavanaugh and the other
Supreme Court Judges.

(D)Amy
Klobuchar: Asked Baker about the importance of free birth control. Baker went
on with family life, life planning, blah, blah, blah. Seriously, I am not pro-life,
but I am not pro-choice. It is not because I cannot decide, it is because I will
not decide for others. Personally, I don’t see myself getting an abortion,
unless a doctor strongly advised me to, for my own health. As for others, I don’t
babysit, I am not going to convince a woman to keep her baby and then not help
her take care of that baby. If she gives up the baby, I am not going to sit and
listen to her cry about it or try to make her feel better. If she gets an
abortion, I am still not going to give her a shoulder to cry on. However, birth
control was not so expensive that women could not afford it, unless they were
wanting the new and improved top of the line, just came out birth control. Plus,
once again condoms cost about $8 for 12 rides, and they not only prevent
pregnancy, they also help to prevent STDs. Yes, condoms are not 100%, but
neither are birth control pills. What really gets to me, is ever since the late
1970s and probably before that, women have been asking, yelling and petitioning
to get insurance companies to pay for a PARTIAL hysterectomy, not just a FULL hysterectomy,
but nope, who cares. Free birth control was not an issue for middle age to
older women, it was mainly an issue with younger women, who didn’t want to make
him wear a condom, or worried about remembering if he wore the condom at last
night’s frat party.

(R)John
Kennedy: He talked about life being better than so many years ago for women,
minorities, etc. He pretty much rambled. He is a rambler. I understand why
Louisiana has re-elected him. He reminds me of pretty much every Coonass I have
ever met. He rambles, and he probably goes home and enjoys his etouffee and
crawdads and loves to listen to Washboard Music.

(D) Sheldon
Whitehouse: Once again he brought up Kavanaugh being nominated by Donald Trump.
He asked Prof. Amar, since Trump is involved and associated with criminal
cases, should he be involved in nominating a Supreme Court Justice. Amar
indicated that historically when Nixon nominated a Supreme Court Judge, the
remaining Supreme Court Judges were divided on whether Nixon had the right to
nominate. Then Whitehouse said he was not into a Judge’s preference and brought
up a case, the Caperton Decision out of West Virginia. The case was different
in that, State Judges in West Virginia Campaign for the position, and so many
years later they campaign again. Plus, the case itself was concerning a legal
issue against the Judge, not the person who nominated the Judge. Whitehouse
then tried to make it sound as if Kavanaugh was promised or given the position
of the Supreme Court Justice rather than being voted in by the Senators.
Ultimately, Whitehouse can take it that way; because, the Senate is currently
Republican, but historically speaking the Democrats have led the Senate and had
the chance to vote in a Supreme Court Judge too. But if Trump just picked
anyone, the Republicans would not instantly jump up and give him/her their vote.

(R) Orrin
Hatch: Asked Olson what he has heard about Kavanaugh throughout his legal circles.
Olson said everyone he knows holds Kavanaugh in high regard. He then asked Amar
what the most important qualities people should look for in a potential Supreme
Court Justice and why should people from both sides of the political aisle,
both Republican and Democrat, support Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination. Amar feels
that Kavanaugh has studied and interpreted the Constitution more than anyone he
has known. He believes that Kavanaugh will be better than the Left is saying
about him on voting rights, women’s rights, minority rights, etc. due to his ability
to be objective in every situation.

(D) Chris
Coons: Asked Richmond if he believes Kavanaugh is the best choice for replacing
Judge Kennedy. Richmond said no and brought up affirmative action and feels
that Kavanaugh will not help support minorities. Thus far, Richmond has
repeated issues brought up by left leaning media groups, minority groups, Al
Sharpton and there has not been any proof behind their issues with Kavanaugh,
therefor I have tossed it into the propaganda box. Coons moved on to whether a
company has a right to make decisions based on religion, specifically free
birth control. Murray believes Kavanaugh would take the side of the employer,
rather than the personal life of an employee. Coons then brought up the
Glucksberg Case, which I could be wrong, but is a case that concerned assisted
suicide. I know some pro-abortion groups have tried to use that case to help
fuel their abortion cause, but Murray didn’t seem to remember the case, or I am
thinking of a different Glucksberg Case. Either way she named off the same
abortion cases she brought up before and went on to say she didn’t believe
Kavanaugh would make a determination on a case by utilizing past decisions with
the perspective of today’s culture and trends.

(R) Mike
Lee: Spoke with Olson, about the removal of an Independent Counsel. Went on to
ask Sinzdak about a case, and Amar about Supreme Court Judge Hugo Black.

(D) Richard
Blumenthal: He repeated that when history is written, about this dark era, the
heroes of this era will be the Independent Judiciary and the free press. He
talked to Olson about Trump’s negative comments about Judge Ginsberg. Olson
gave his personal views about it, he did not comment on Kavanaugh’s response to
the same question. He moved on to Garza about what Kavanaugh called a “delay”
in allowing Jane Doe’s abortion. Garza, lied, by saying “Jane Doe never once
waivered”. Jane Doe’s “waiver” is what brought in the Federal Level.

(D) Cory
Booker: He went back to Garza’s “Jane Doe” case. Calling it “gut wrenching” and
did not understand why Garza could not maintain being her legal guardian. This
kind of rolls into common sense. Jane Doe’s LAWYER who is fighting to promote
an abortion case, would only be in the client’s best interest, as long as Jane
Doe maintained a 100% decision to have an abortion. As soon as Jane Doe told
anyone that she was not 100% sure she wanted an abortion, Garza was put in a
spot, does she still support her client, or does she try to help her career and
support the abortion case. At that
point, it is in the client’s best interest to have a new parental guardian. However,
Booker looked at it as if Kavanaugh was postponing the abortion to look good in
front of Trump in hopes of being nominated for Supreme Court Judge. He then
moved on to Richmond, who at the age of 34 had a lot to say about racial
profiling especially “driving while black”. Richmond was born in 1973, he would
have started legally driving in about 1990. So, he never experienced the level
of racial profiling in the 1930s, 40s, 50s and 60s. Not to say that any level
is acceptable, but he goes on as if society has suddenly jumped back into the
50s again, and of course it all started when Donald Trump became President. If
so, where are all the YouTube videos? Seriously, when Barack Obama was
President there was one video after another, showing a Police Officer pulling
over a Black man or woman. Now the videos have majorly reduced. Don’t tell me
YouTube started removing them. They are going to court along with other social
sites for removing Conservative content, if they were removing Liberal content,
there would REALLY be a big uproar. Voting in Kavanaugh will not drag the U.S.
back to the 50s. There are eight other Judges and they are not sitting waiting
for another Republican Judge to come in so, they can suddenly go all Klu Klux
Klan on the U.S. Give me a break. Historically, there has been times when the
Supreme Court had more Republican Judges than Democrat Judges and the times did
not start rolling back into slavery or barefoot pregnant wives.

(D) Kamala
Harris: Asked Richmond what is meant by a “Racial Spoils System”. According to
Richmond, it has to do with white people thinking black people are taking their
jobs, and it mainly occurs in the South. Not sure, what “South” he is talking
about, but I have never heard it in South Texas or North Central Texas. Either way I looked it up and a Professor
Weissberg from New York, explained the phrase “Racial Spoils System” was another
name for “Affirmative Action”. Affirmative Action originally started in 1965,
when minorities were being discriminated and unable to find a good job or get
into a good college. Race discrimination now a days is nothing compared to what
it was like in the 1960s, even though some politicians would like to make
people think otherwise. Companies are still being forced to hire people who are
a certain gender or race, which is fine if that person is the best qualified,
but when you have to say no to the best qualified for another applicant, it
means the system is broken and needs to be removed or replaced. Apparently, it
is only an issue in the South according to Booker. One would think, if the
South was so bad for minorities to live in, why would over 50% of the Black
population choose to live in the South? One would think if the North is race
neutral, all the minorities would move up North. Sorry, but I have heard the
worst racial slurs from people up North when they are passing through during
their vacation, hanging out in the South during the winter or chatting away at
social sites. I am staying in the South.

(D) Mazie
Hirono: Asked Weintraub if she feels Kavanaugh would hinder the best interests
of the disabled. I don’t know what case Weintraub originally brought up, but her
issue was that Kavanaugh did not accept the information offered by her organization
for the disabled. Since, I don’t know the specific case, I can’t say whether
the information would have been useful, merely extra information or past any
specified due date. However, Weinstraub believes that Kavanaugh will not
consider the disabled’s wants and needs when making future rulings. Hirono
moved on to asking Murray about the Garza case (underage illegal minor seeking
an abortion). According to Hirono, Kavanaugh had said the Garza case was an
issue of parental consent, and Murray said no, parental consent had already
been achieved. (Hopefully, the Republicans or Kavanaugh supplies the
documentation that shows how the case ended up at the Federal level.)

(R) Thom
Tillis: Asked Amar to bring up a case that sheds some light on Kavanaugh. Amar brought up a case dealing with executive power. The case was concerning the ability to fire someone with no cause. Kavanaugh's suggestion is that a person can still be fired by the President, but there should be a reason. Amar believes Kavanaugh's reasoning is one that the other Supreme Court Judges would be willing to look at.

Second Group of Witnesses

The
Committee went to lunch and returned with a new set of witnesses.

A.J. Kramer:
Federal Public Defender and pro-Kavanugh. He regrets Chief Judge Garland did
not become a Supreme Court Judge and he agrees with a previous witness, Richmond,
concerning racism in the Justice System. When it comes to criminal cases he believes
Kavanaugh is objective, asks numerous questions, specifically important
questions concerning the case. Kavanaugh always makes sure that mens rea has
been proven.

Aalayah
Eastmond: Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Student in Parkland, Florida,
Anti-Kavanaugh. She was at the school during the school shooting that occurred
February 2018. She gave accounts of her experience during the shooting. During
her account (D) Cory Booker had to wipe the tears from his eyes. If Booker was
not acting like a showman from day one of the hearing, I may have taken his
tears to be authentic, but due to all the acting he has already done, I will
probably toss his tears over to the People’s Choice awards for their ruling. After
she was finished with her experience she went on to say racism is at
fault for the gun violence, being black she cannot feel safe around law enforcement,
and since Kavanaugh did not shake hands with the father of a victim he should
not be elected SCOTUS. Note: The shaking
hands issue had come up earlier in the media on I believe Day 1. Kavanaugh was
leaving the room during a break and did not notice someone stepping out to
shake his hand and the security officer ended up telling the man to step back.
Liberal media continues to utilize camera footage that makes it appear as if
the man was right in front of Kavanaugh and there was no way he could have
missed it. However, an angle that allows for a better view and does not manipulate
the location of each person, shows the man was a bit further away and did not
manage to step out into the walkway until Kavanaugh had already passed. Additionally,
there is no reason anyone, including Kavanaugh should have instantly recognized
the man as the father of a Parkland shooting victim.

Rebecca Taibleson: Former Law Clerk, Pro-Kavanaugh.
Kavanaugh starts every case with an open mind and with the idea that either
side may be right. And... the microphones
either ended up unplugged or malfunctioned… It did occur at the same time
security was escorting out protestors… and they fixed it and she started over.
She continues with: He reads and re-reads every brief he receives concerning a
case. He has his clerks predict every possible argument for both sides of a
case, even if their lawyers did not think of it. Kavanaugh makes a judgement
with a combination of the law and the facts. Something that protects the
American People who would otherwise deal with a Judge who decides based on
their personal beliefs. She went on to say that Kavanaugh is an easy person to talk
to, he can be nice, funny and easy going. When it comes to women, he has hired
more women than other Judges. Some of those women have moved on to be lawyers and
Judges.

Jackson Corbin: 13 years old and has Noonan Syndrome
and will always have a pre-existing condition. He talked about his daily life,
including his siblings and parents. He is anti-Kavanaugh and believes Kavanaugh
is a threat to the Affordable Care Act.

Hunter LaChance: Asthma sufferer. He is anti-Kavanaugh
and worries Kavanaugh will help Republicans increase the pollution across the
US. He said in previous cases Kavanaugh has struck down clean air cases.
Including a clean air case that made states responsible for the air that goes
into other states. (Wonder if there is a
case against the smoke coming into the US when Mexico burns their crops and trash.
Or a case against Africa for allowing all that dust to flow over the Atlantic
and into the US.)

Maureen Mahoney: Constitutional and Appellate Lawyer
and a former Deputy Solicitor General in the George W. Bush Administration. She
cannot think of a Judge that is more qualified for SCOTUS than Kavanaugh.

Melissa Smith: U.S. Grant High School Teacher. She
is pro-Union and she believes Kavanaugh will pick big business over her
students. She brought up her ability to accept trans-gender students, illegal
immigrants and special needs kids. She does not believe Kavanaugh will support all
her students.

Kenneth Christmas: Yale Law School Roommate with Kavanaugh.
As an African American he has brought up race-based conversations with Kavanaugh
and truly believes Kavanaugh has cared about the issues and understands those
issue. He believes he is a GOOD friend to Kavanaugh, partially due to the
inconvenience of being a Democrat who has had to defend his Republican friend.

Senators begin Questioning the Second
Group of Witnesses

(R) Chuck Grassley: He wants Christmas to share his
experience with the concerns of the other witnesses and Senators. Christmas said
he understands their concerns, but there is not reason to fear him with those
concerns.

(D) Sheldon Whitehouse: Started by telling Eastman that she is
a brave girl and no child should ever have to live through a school shooting.
He then told Corbin he understands being the little kid in school and that Corbin
is a brave little boy. He moved on to LeChance and understands the issues of
neighboring states and how other states effect the air in his state. He went back
to Eastman and told her that the biggest issue is the NRA controls Congress and
everything that has to do with guns and they allow people to have the guns and
the ammunition that tore through her fellow classmates. He then seemed to also blame the NRA for
risking people’s healthcare. He feels Kavanaugh will enhance the power of the
NRA and those who are not willing to protect the environment.

(R) Orrin Hatch: He asked Kramer (public defender) if
he ever witnessed Kavanaugh look down or offend anyone due to their low income
or treated anyone differently because of their financial status. Kramer replied
that Kavanaugh has always treated everyone equally. He takes everyone’s view
into consideration. He then asked Mahoney (Attorney) what kind of job has he
done as a Jurist? She said he has done a phenomenal job and is very hard working
and extremely careful about his work. He is renowned for his work ethic. Hatch
asked what other lawyers say about Kavanaugh. She said everyone adores him and
recommends him for everything. There is a deep uniformed respect for Kavanaugh.

(D) Richard Blumenthal: He asked Eastman (High School
Student) if Kavanaugh took the side of the “assault weapon” over you, what
would you say? “That my life along with all the other youths is more important
than that gun.” She believes the “assault rifle” used in Parkland, FL and all “assault
rifles” should be banned.

(R) Mike Lee: Asked Mahoney (Lawyer) her look at
how people are making this a political decision. She responded by saying the
law is the law. It is not partisan, Kavanaugh will make fair decisions. Lee
brought up there is no political isle and a 4 to 5 decision between 9 judges is
very rare. Mahoney agreed with him. Lee then asked Taiblson (Clerk) how
Kavanaugh interacted with his colleagues, regardless of the political views. She
said he is direct and sure there are disagreements, but he has them in good
faith. He asked Smith (Teacher) how she connects her concerns with her worries
about school resources with the position of the Supreme Court. Her concern was
school vouchers, and historically Kavanaugh has said he agrees with school
vouchers. Note: In general, the U.S. Supreme Court does not affect public
schools. Some public-school cases have made their way to the Supreme Court,
such as Tinker v. Des Moines ISD that allowed students to wear black arm bands
in protest of the Vietnam War. However, public-school funding is a State issue.

(D) Cory Booker: Asked Eastmond (High School student)
what issues she has that could be brought to the Supreme Court. She said
banning all assault rifles, high capacity magazines and for Congress to focus more
on “Black and Brown students”.

Peter Shane: Ohio State University Law Professor.
He believes Trump is currently committed multiple crimes and should not be
nominating a Supreme Court Justice. He believes that George W. Bush committed
numerous crimes while Kavanaugh was working at the White House.

Senators begin Questioning the Second
Group of Witnesses

(R) Chuck Grassley: Asked if Lisa Heinzerling and Peter Shane
were afraid that Kavanaugh will cause a shift in the Supreme Court that will
give the President more power. Heinzerling felt that he would instantly allow
an increase in power. Shane believes the Supreme Court can cause an increase in
power, but that is an issue for both parties. Democrats have tried to make the shift
and Republicans have tried to make the shift. Adam White believes each Judge
will evaluate each issue. How it will affect the people and if it will do any
harm, not allow it.

(D) Sheldon Whitehouse: He spoke to John Dean and brought up
Kavanaugh’s article: Separation
of Powers During the Forty-Fourth Presidency and Beyond. Indicating that a
President should not be immune to prosecution, but if the U.S. is under any kind
of duress, Congress can push the President’s court dates to after the term ends,
and a shift in his views toward Nixon. Not sure about the shift in views toward
Nixon, and Dean wasn’t sure either. Whitehouse moved on to ask Lisa Heinzerling
about environmental cases going through court and in some cases the cost to fix
an issue is considered too high, so the company doesn’t fix it and the people continue
to suffer. Heinzerling brought up how the power of Congress will say no,
Kavanaugh will choose the law over the people and if states agencies cannot
step in, the people suffer.

(D) Chris Coons: Asked John Dean what would happen if
the President can do as they please without being checked. John Dean said Nixon
would have been able to continue his criminal activity. Coons moved on to Peter
Shane and Lisa Heinzerling. Kavanaugh had said earlier the article Separation
of Powers During the Forty-Fourth Presidency and Beyond was written as a
suggestion to Congress. Congress currently has the right to put a case on hold,
it is not a SCOTUS decision.

(D) Mazie Hirono: Asked John Dean if he worried about
Kavanaugh increasing Presidential power. He is worried that Kavanaugh will
create a party of 5 Republican Judges that can help increase Presidential
power. She went on to ask Heinzerling if Kavanaugh about environment cases.
Heinzerling believes Kavanaugh will not be good for the environment.

(D) Richard Blumenthal: Asked John Dean if during the Nixon
investigation if he wrote an anonymous op-ed about the investigation. Dean said
no, he did not write any anonymous op-eds. Not sure where Blumenthal was going
with. As far as I know, none of Kavanaugh’s op-eds are written anonymously.
They believe Trump should step down, until all his legal cases are over. John Dean
went on to say that one thing he still respect about Nixon is at the end of the
day, he still had respect for the “rule of law” and Trump does not have that
respect.

(R) John Kennedy: Spoke with Monica Mastal about her
daughter’s soccer team and how Kavanaugh is as a Coach. She indicated that he
pays attention to the kids, nice to kids, great with the parents and so on. He
also asked Jennifer Mascott if through out her one year as Kavanaugh’s law
clerk, did he ever take politics into consideration. She said, no, never. He researched
the law and cases. Kennedy finally asked Paul Clement if the Supreme Court
should televise all arguments. Clement believes they should be televised. He ended
by telling John Dean that he believes “you and your co-conspirators hurt my Country.
Uhm, I believe in second chances, but you did the right thing, ultimately. But
you only did it when you were cornered like a rat, and it’s hard for me to take
your testimony seriously. I am going to give you a chance to respond, but I
couldn’t sleep tonight if I didn’t tell you that.” John Dean said the President
also called him a rat. He said he tried to warn Nixon during the recorded
meetings, with hints but he did not succeed. He said he wrote a book about all the
conversations that were secretly recorded, and he learned a lot that he had not
known. He did not say the name of the book, but I believe he was referring to: The
Nixon Defense: What He Knew and When He Knew It, by John Dean

That was the
end of the final day of the Brett Kavanaugh Judiciary Hearing. It did take
longer, partially due to the number of witnesses, but also due to no one questioning
the authenticity of what some of the witnesses were saying. Senators asked them
questions, but no specifics about court cases. Kavanaugh did not even have a
chance to defend or explain himself. So, I took the time to look up any relevant
court cases if possible. The Democrats brought in witnesses to help support their
pro-abortion and anti-gun agendas. Their last group of witnesses mainly rolled
around wanting to limit the power of the President. I do find it funny how
Democrat politicians are going on about Presidential power, but a few years ago
they were working overtime to find a way to increase Obama’s power. Now that
they no longer control the White House and they don’t have a majority in the
Senate they want to be able to create government organizations that cannot be affected
by Congress. It is not to promote small government, it is to continue with
their agenda, whatever it may be.